In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the largest public school district in Maryland likely violated parents’ right to free exercise of religion under the First Amendment when it implemented a policy that prohibited parents from opting their children out of classroom instruction involving LGBTQ-themed storybooks.
Beginning in 2022, the Montgomery County Board of Education approved numerous LGBTQ-themed books for inclusion in its curriculum. Initially, the school district notified parents prior to introducing the books into the curriculum and allowed parents to exclude their children from any lessons involving the books. However, in 2023, the school district suddenly and without explanation reversed course by enacting a policy of withholding notice and prohibiting opt-outs for any reason, including religious beliefs.
In response, a group of parents filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging that the school district violated their rights to free exercise of religion under the First Amendment and seeking a preliminary injunction that would reinstate the prior policy permitting parents the opportunity to receive notice and opt their children out of instruction involving the LGBTQ-themed books. The United States District Court for the District of Maryland denied the parents’ request for a preliminary injunction. A three-judge panel on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which has jurisdiction over Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia), affirmed the lower court’s decision in a 2-1 split decision.
The parents appealed to the Untied States Supreme Court, which ultimately agreed to hear the case. At issue before the Supreme Court was whether compelling students to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parents’ religious convictions and without notice or opportunity to opt out violated their First Amendment right to the free exercise of their religion.
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts’ decisions, ruling in favor of the parents and granting the preliminary injunction. The Supreme Court found that the school district’s decision to deny opt-outs placed an unconstitutional burden on the parents’ religious freedom, emphasizing that the Constitution protects parents’ rights to direct their children’s religious development. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that the school district’s policy to both withhold notice of use of the LGBTQ-themed books in the school’s curriculum and further deny the parents’ ability to opt their children out of the curriculum for any reason substantially interfered with the parents’ ability to guide their children’s religious development. The Supreme Court emphasized that although schools have a compelling interest in maintaining an undisrupted educational environment, the school district’s stated justification for the policy—that it was needed to address student absenteeism, classroom disruption, administrative burden, and potential stigmatization of individuals represented in the books—was not “narrowly tailored” to achieve those interests, as required when applying “strict scrutiny” to determine if a law is unconstitutional.
This case reinforces parents’ ability to direct the religious upbringing of their children and demonstrates the limits on a school district’s ability to interfere with a student’s religious upbringing in a public-school setting.
For questions about this case or curriculum more broadly, please contact Jennifer Rosenberg in our Students/Special Ed practice group.
Source: Mahmoud v. Taylor, No. 24-297, 2025 WL 1773627 (U.S. June 27, 2025)
